old55

One question asked why we have only 5 good kicks on the list and included Hibberd in the set!

I'm a renowned happy clapper so the informative midfield pre season graph is preaching to the converted. It was interesting when Lamb was addressing the Frost trade he reeled off backline players but didn't mention Petty. Later on Goodwin said one experiments from the 2nd half of the season that worked and we'll persist with is Petty forward. Ironically for the first questioner that means we'll see plenty of OMac back in 2020. @binman fortify your defences and sharpen your spears. Also interesting was Jones small forward and Smith back.

It's risk mitigation. If they really want Green and we don't bid they win big time - pick 4 and Green. This is just a safety net get out method in case we do bid.

If we bid on Green GWS could split 4 for a later 1st rounder and a 2020 1st rounder and match the bid with 2019 picks and quarantine the 2020 1st. For example trade 4 with GC for 15 + 2020 priority 11. Use 15 and later picks for Green and end up with a better 2020 1st rounder than they just traded away. There's lots of permutations.

I think it will ultimately come down to where we think the players we want will fall. 10 + 22 12 + 18 14 + 17 All offer similar value but may deliver different players.

You'll be singing a different tune when Lever and May are MFC Premiership players.

Candidates for pick 8 trade: Freo: 10 + 22 GC: 15 + 20 Geelong: 14 + 17 (24 too late for me) Port: 2 of 12, 16 and 18

The cobblers are the pro recruiters and the cobbling is recruiting, that's what ProDee is saying. Let the experts do what they do and amateurs and armchair experts should be circumspect. You are not a cobbler.

Still didn't answer "who" specifically we should be going for.

Jarrod Witts?

I agree DS and 247, we'd be pretty set on pick 3 now and have half a dozen plans in place at pick 8 because live pick trading.

Pretty sure MFC bid on Green at 3. If GWS down trade for 2 x 2019 picks all the value will go on the match. Their best strategy is to trade 6 for a pick in the teens and a future first. That way only the teens pick and later picks get swallowed by the match for Green, the future 1st is quarantined. Possible clubs are Geelong, Port and GC (2020 mid 1st round compo)

Occam's Razor says we want him at 3. Taylor explicitly said we don't play games in the draft - although he was referring to a bid on Green, I think you can generalise the concept.

GWS get 20% discount on the bid pick points. They have to use their next highest picks in order. They would get Green and 43 as change from 14 and 17 on a bid at pick 3.

Yeah all made by couch amateurs. You gotta trust the experts you pay to do the job. Taylor said there was a 2 day conference to work through the candidates and Goodwin was involved so there are plenty of checks and balances. If Taylor and co think it's Jackson then the club needs to back their judgement.

Yes that's another way players can move up media and fan ranking without actually playing. What recruiters think gets into the public domain. Re-read AW's post, he said "how can he move up without playing?"

That's a good link thanks. So he played 5 Colts games after the U18 Championships so judging him solely on the Championships is flawed. Taylor said in his interview that he really focused on particular players - probably Jackson. He got a lot of hit outs in those games so understandably played a lot of ruck. I'm happy to take him if Taylor rates him. Pretty big excitement factor.

Only in media and fans eyes. Pro recruiters will have had a view all along but it's not in the public domain. "Sliders" is a nuff nuff concept, if 10 clubs in a row don't select a player then that's where they're rated, but it only takes one club to really like a particular player for him to go earlier than expected so a "bolter" is possible.

Lots of "no" there. Who should we be going after?

I was suggesting it was the other way around - who we intend to draft influences who we target in DFA. If we're taking Young we've got less need for HB depth and Murray and if we're not taking Jackson we have more need for tall depth hence Brown. Yeah what DeeSpencer said.

Could be we're looking at Young ahead of Jackson in the draft and therefore Brown ahead of Murray DFA. List spots are limited and we have 3, 8, 97 and Bennell to accomodate. That leaves 1 free Senior list spot.

I'll be very surprised if we bid Henry at 3 or 4. He wasn't mentioned by Taylor at either 3 or 8 in the Road to the Draft interview. Jackson, Young and Green, then Kemp and Robertson IIRC.

I dont think that's certain. See Lucifer's Hero post earlier. I also don't think it's certain GWS would match a bid on Green at 3. They might have traded up to 6 for Jackson.

Maximum deficit is the points value of the last pick in the first round so they can cover the deficit with a future 1st even if they win the flag.

Close but no cigar. The team matching the bid has to supply picks worth 80% of the pick bid on the player. They get a 20% discount. So if we bid Green at 3 = 2234pts, GWS have to supply 1787 pts to match. Coincidentally pick 6 is worth very nearly that.